Well, I need to get some thoughts out quickly before I forget. So much I want to comment on keeps happening, and I can't seem to keep up sometimes.
Haiti, of all places, has been hit with an earthquake. I've always said the political situation in that country needed a severe shake-up, but this isn't quite what I meant. One can only hope that as an accidental consequence of this disaster, we can find out why the hell Haiti has over ten thousand charities working within it, yet the country remains one of the poorest on earth. Meanwhile, the news media has apparently decided that this is the only news story, and that nothing else is happening. Granted, this happened once before when Michael Jackson died, but this time, it's actually a news story worth reporting. And, for once, the media has actually decided to report a disaster where thousands of brown-skinned, poor people get killed. Ordinarily, that's not even a back-page news story. Hutus and Tutsis can massacre each other, Mogadishu can go completely tits up, and the media doesn't seem to care. This time, it's news, perhaps because it's so close to Florida.
Or perhaps because the Carnival Cruise Lines can no longer park cheaply at Port Au Prince, or, as the brochures call it, "The Lovely Island of Hispaniola." Quick! Somebody call the Coast Guard!
Oh, wait, somebody DID call the Coast Guard. Okay, how about this: Quick! Somebody pass health care reform with a public option! Now, while the media's distracted!
Does anybody else feel like early-term presidencies repeat themselves? Early into George W. Bush's presidency, we were right back in Iraq just like with George Bush Sr. About a year into Obama's presidency, we're having a crisis in Haiti, just like in Bill Clinton's first term. Jeez! Deja Vu all over again! Okay, granted, the Hatian crisis during Bubba's first term wasn't brought about by an earthquake. Rather, it was brought about because the election process down there was only slightly worse than Florida in 2000. (Har, har!) But still, eerie parallels!
So let's examine the news items the media has decided no longer need covering because Haiti should eclipse everything. First, Harry Reid commented that Obama was electable because he didn't have a "Negro dialogue unless he wanted one." Republicans are crying for his resignation, calling a parallel with Trent Lott when he supported Strom Thurmond.
This is screwy on so many levels. What, precisely, was the offense? Was it because Reed pointed out that Obama didn't talk like some inner city gangsta? It can't be that, because it's true! Or maybe white politicians simply aren't allowed to use the word 'negro' in any context? Nah, even politicians can use the word in an academic setting. No, I think the true offense is that Reed called inner city slang, "negro dialect," in spite of the fact that so many "wiggers" talk exactly the same. What he meant, of course, iz dat u cant win no damm elecshun if u tawk lik sum fuhl uvva luzer. True dat! You CAN'T win if you talk that way! At anything, much less a presidential election. But that's not a 'dialect,' nor is it exclusively for inner city blacks. It's disturbingly spoken by an increasing number of suburban white kids and rednecks in trailers.
But is it the same situation as Trent Lott? Hardly, because of who was offended. In Reed's case, the offense was against Obama, and he's forgiven him. End of story. In the case of Lott, the offense was agaisnt the entire black American populace, and they didn't forgive. And let's not forget just how big a DICK Strom Thurmond was -- a man who built his political career on being a segregationist asswipe. Anyone who would defend that old shit deserved to get fired. There's no double standard, there.
Next up, the trial of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed in New York. Conservatives have been calling this a miscarriage of justice because he's going to receive a civilian trial instead of a military tribunal as though he represented a specific country in a time of war.
Let's take a walk down memory lane, shall we? Timothy McVeigh was a terrorist. Arguably, he was even worse that Khalid Mohammed, because he was raised in the U.S., enjoying all its freedoms and privileges, and still took up arms against it anyway. That rat bastard was given, yes, a CIVILIAN trial! He was tried, sentenced, and given the death penalty. And we had less of a case against him than we do against Khalid. So to those who think it's a travesty to try this 9/11 mastermind in a civilian court in the city which suffered his actions, all I can say is, WHAT THE FUCK!?! You really think someone like Timothy McVeigh gets a civilian trial, but someone like Khalid Muhammed doesn't? You really think it's realistic to say that this guy could get off? Or maybe you're one of the few damned fools who think that CHRISTIAN terrorists get a fair trial, but Muslim terrorists dont?!
This all ties in to the terrifying notion conservatives have had lately of presuming people to be guilty before trial has begun. Oh, maybe not necessarily in Khalid Muhammed's case, but certainly in the case of Guantanamo Bay. The repeated mantra I hear is a presumption that just because someone's detained at Gitmo, that person must be guilty. Why? Well, they were detained, weren't they?
Honestly, we don't fully appreciate just how close the Bush administration took us towards George Orwell's 1984. Presumption of innocense is a vital safeguard that's present for an overwhelmingly important reason: Without it, it's mob justice!
So, as our trophy president, Obama, seeks to rebuild the democratic freedoms we nearly lost, let's all of us help "rebuild" Haiti. (As if it were all that "built" to begin with. You know, with all the buildings knocked down, the city of Port Au Prince looks rather much the same.) But it's certainly interesting that the Obama administration seems to have already done more for Haiti in a day than the Bush administration did for New Orleans in a year.
Eric
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Sunday, January 10, 2010
America is Polish!
I think it’s time to redefine Polock. It’s traditionally used to describe someone of Polish descent, but it should mean something else. After all, it’s often a term that’s been used as an insult. T.V.’s Archie Bunker repeatedly called his son-in-law a “Meathead Polock,” invoking the once-common prejudice our grandfathers had regarding Polish people being generally stupid. At least two generations of children, including my generation, has grown up telling “Polish jokes” on the playground, and now that we’re all grown up, we wonder why. Polish people successfully built a church here in Milwaukee so grand that the Catholic Archdiocese officially dubbed it a Basilica. (St. Joshophat’s on 6th and Lincoln.) Pope John Paul II was Polish. Poles have repeatedly been successful doctors, lawyers, and scientists. Yet the perception that a Polock is tantamount to being a dunderhead has persisted throughout recent decades. The saying I’d always heard was that the three people you should beware of in this life are an American with a contract to sign, an Irishman with a favor to ask, and a Polock with an idea to offer. Where does this perception of Polish people being stupid come from?
I think it probably has something to do with World War II, when Poland was invaded. The Polish army attempted to stand up to tanks and airplanes with cavalry and rifles. That’s all they really had to defend themselves with at the time, but in retrospect, it did look pretty stupid. Poland was the only country which did not prepare for war in Europe of the 1930’s, hence the stupidity stereotype. The country ended up bifurcated, with one side going to the Soviets, and the other to Nazi Germany.
Poetically, that’s the perfect image for my suggestion to re-define what “Polock” means. Because currently, we are being “polarized” in exactly the same sort of way. Half of our country going one way, and half the other.
I see this repeatedly as I listen to the news broadcasts and talking heads shows. I see this on the college campuses and talking to people in bars. People don’t see issues in terms of ethical questions anymore. They don’t see them in terms of right vs. wrong anymore, either. No, they see them in terms of liberal vs. conservative. If you’re batting for Team Conservative, nothing liberals do is right. If you’re batting for Team Liberal, everything conservatives do is wrong. The liberals see conservatism as evil, and the conservatives see liberalism as super-evil. In other words, we’re “polarized,” making us “Poles,” with one pole going one way, and one pole going the other, just like a North and a South “pole.” We’re a “Polish” country! Or, perhaps it’s best said, a “poll-ish” country.
This is important, because it really divides us unnecessarily. Dates end on a perfunctory note because of political differences. Old friends who have known each other since kindergarten end up bickering instead of getting together for a beer. Coworkers argue with each other. Entire news networks bend towards catering to one side or the other, and when one political side begins moving the rope their way in this endless tug-of-war, angry mobs of people assemble to ruin town hall meetings and drive out any rational discourse in favor of utter chaos. How the hell did we end up fighting with each other like this?
I think it has to do with the fact that we’re so information overloaded that we have a hard time gathering news. We have family, work, kids, school… and maybe a few precious moments alone, or half an hour to watch a favorite TV show each week. Who the hell has the time to keep up? So, many of us turn to news outlets which give us our news in quick bursts, and political interests have successfully taken those news outlets over to constantly feed politics of only one side or the other during that limited time. For young busy people, quick news wrapped in humor is the ideal choice, such as the Daily Show. To older, busy adults, news outlets which talk about current events while you’re working or driving in your car, such as talk radio, are preferred. So , in reaction to the perception that major news networks were too liberal, investors with grandpa’s values started buying up A.M. radio wherever they could, and this started sometime during Reagan’s administration. Two years after Clinton’s election and debacle over gays in the military, radio had gotten so completely polarized towards the conservative side that it won congress back for the Republicans. In reaction, cable T.V. seemed to become more liberal. In reaction, FOX news was launched. In reaction, Air America radio was launched, along with MSNBC. But cable news is for young people while radio is an old-man’s format. So Air America largely failed, while MSNBC was successful. Now, mega-corporations with partisan interests are constantly trying to buy up our last 15 minutes of free-time to influence our opinions – and it’s working! We’re partisan, and we’ve taken to hating our fellow Americans!
That’s the problem. What’s the solution? The solution is to remember that being polarized, that is, being “Polish,” is tantamount to being a dunderhead! If you think that conservatives are always right, and liberals are always wrong, or vice-versa, you’re just a dumb, meathead “Polock.” In the REAL world, conservatives are sometimes right, and sometimes wrong. In the REAL world, liberals are also sometimes right and sometimes wrong. That’s just reality of the world in which we live. To equate either conservatism or liberalism with evil is just plain childish!
Here’s a true gem: You always learn more from those with a different view than your own. So the way to learn the most is to actively seek those views out! Only half a political perspective, conservative or liberal, is only half the story. And here’s another one: Half a political perspective is the same as only having half a brain! We have right and left halves of our brain, but they function well because they cooperate across that all-important bridge called the corpus callosum.
Our society needs a little more corpus callosum.
So here’s your assignment: Take some time to listen to the other side’s news outlet. If you’re liberal, watch FOX News awhile. If you’re conservative, watch the Rachel Maddow show, or something else truly liberal. (Public radio doesn’t count. No, it’s not liberal. Seriously!) Also, read some news sources from other nations who don’t have the political polarizations we do.
I believe it was Ralph Waldo Emerson who said that if you have the same views today that you held four years ago, that you’ve wasted four years of your life.
Now go climb the other side of the mountain!
Eric
Wednesday, December 30, 2009
Color Blind To Nudity
Recently, PZ Meyers did what I recently did regarding the movie, Avatar, and posted a movie review on his blog, Pharyngula, about it. I guess great minds think alike -- except I did it first. (Nyah-nyah!)
But he mentioned something interesting about the main characters being big, blue, and naked. Somehow, seems like we, as a society, don't seem to mind nudity all that much, provided that it's placed in some other hue besides fleshtone. Whether it's the big blue and virtually topless Na'vi aliens of Pandora, or the big blue and strangely half-circumcised penis of Dr. Manhattan, we seem to regard colorized nudity to be something which doesn't count -- almost as if paint acts as a kind of clothing.
This is nothing new. Back in the 1960's the Star Trek pilot episode, "The Cage" featured the green-skinned Orion women, who were said to be sexually irresistable. Susan oliver danced about in her barely clad costume and shook her generous hips (Oh, how I wish Hollywood would bring back real women who are shaped like that!) and made for a watershed event in terms of how much sexuality sci-fi could get away with on television and the silver screen. All hail the Starfleet Uniform miniskirt!
But there's more to it than that. We seem to regard CGI nudity in that same category. It's as if the fact that the nudity is generated by a computer somehow masks actual nudity even more effectively than paint. We again can point to Dr. Manhattan, or the deliberate nudity of the CGI film, Beowulf, which had plenty of computer-nudity and even dared to show Sir Anthony Hopkins nearly naked. But this really is a phenomenon that goes all the way back to the film Boogie Nights, which culminated with an obvious piece of special effects which added at least five inches to Marky-Mark Walhlberg's dick. No, you're not a star.
But if they can do that with computers, what's not possible? Hmmm, maybe they should re-do the Laura Croft Tomb Raider movies! Or maybe, by contrast, Playboy magazine should finally stop air-brushing? With such realism made possible with such technology, it's really only a matter of time before the best X-rated movies won't even need victimized women on cocaine doing it with old male thugs on Viagra anymore. (Good riddance!) Supersized boobs will merely be a mouse-click away. And we really won't be able to tell the difference between real boobs on a fat woman and fake boobs on a skinny one, because a computer can simply take one and superimpose it on the other. There may even be computer programmable porno movies where you can type in your preferences to make hours and hours of fun-filled screwing scenes with women who have exactly the proportions you prefer.
Oh, it's a great time to be male!
My point in talking about all that is simply this: How is it that in the midst of all this, we somehow developed enough anal-retentiveness as a society to go all ape-shit when Janet Jackson showed her non-painted, non-CGI generated, and merely B-cup sized boob for half a damned second on the halftime show of the 2004 Superbowl? And why, in the midst of all the scantily-clad female back-up dancers and shirtless male dancers in spandex, did this at all matter?
It's the 21st century going on one decade as of midnight tonight, and we'll have to all recognize that if we can't come to grips with our own skin, we'll never get by. This matters, not because we're a society of prudes who need to get over it -- although that's a compelling enough reason by itself. No, it matters because the advertizers who want to take advantage of us do so by titilating us sexually, and the prudes who fight agaisnt open sexuality unwittingly give them cover -- allowing them to snipe at us with sneak peeks at the forbidden. To free ourselves from this situation, we need to open our minds, and sometimes our buttons, to the reality that nudity isn't such a big deal. With that mindset, society forces advertizers to sell their products based on their merit - and that scares them!
But it matters also to achieving a more peaceful world. There are two simple ways entertainment can be spiced up: One is with more sex. The other is with more violence. And with one avenue closed, the other avenue becomes more attractive to producers. We've seen this with soap operas -- where the endless audience of As the World Turns has gotten bored with all the sex, and so episodes now frequently feature murder. But outside the world of soaps, the avenue of sex has only barely been used, and so we find that our children frequently see people being killed with guns, and seldom seeing the tenderness of human love and affection.
Pardon the double entendre, but fuck that!
Well, I say, more sex, less violence! 'Make love not war' is a mantra that is equally suitable for the silver screen as it once was for the war in Vietnam. And women can easily use their sexuality to persuade more men to be non-violent. O, Woman, thou has more power than thou knowest! Fucking USE it! You'll find that witholding sex from the violent shitheads of this world quickly eliminates their presence. And we NEED that!
And the first step towards that situation, is getting over the nudity. We shouldn't have to resort to CGI or pretty blue or green colors in order to allow us to see skin. Let's be adults about our bodies, for once!
Eric
But he mentioned something interesting about the main characters being big, blue, and naked. Somehow, seems like we, as a society, don't seem to mind nudity all that much, provided that it's placed in some other hue besides fleshtone. Whether it's the big blue and virtually topless Na'vi aliens of Pandora, or the big blue and strangely half-circumcised penis of Dr. Manhattan, we seem to regard colorized nudity to be something which doesn't count -- almost as if paint acts as a kind of clothing.
This is nothing new. Back in the 1960's the Star Trek pilot episode, "The Cage" featured the green-skinned Orion women, who were said to be sexually irresistable. Susan oliver danced about in her barely clad costume and shook her generous hips (Oh, how I wish Hollywood would bring back real women who are shaped like that!) and made for a watershed event in terms of how much sexuality sci-fi could get away with on television and the silver screen. All hail the Starfleet Uniform miniskirt!
But there's more to it than that. We seem to regard CGI nudity in that same category. It's as if the fact that the nudity is generated by a computer somehow masks actual nudity even more effectively than paint. We again can point to Dr. Manhattan, or the deliberate nudity of the CGI film, Beowulf, which had plenty of computer-nudity and even dared to show Sir Anthony Hopkins nearly naked. But this really is a phenomenon that goes all the way back to the film Boogie Nights, which culminated with an obvious piece of special effects which added at least five inches to Marky-Mark Walhlberg's dick. No, you're not a star.
But if they can do that with computers, what's not possible? Hmmm, maybe they should re-do the Laura Croft Tomb Raider movies! Or maybe, by contrast, Playboy magazine should finally stop air-brushing? With such realism made possible with such technology, it's really only a matter of time before the best X-rated movies won't even need victimized women on cocaine doing it with old male thugs on Viagra anymore. (Good riddance!) Supersized boobs will merely be a mouse-click away. And we really won't be able to tell the difference between real boobs on a fat woman and fake boobs on a skinny one, because a computer can simply take one and superimpose it on the other. There may even be computer programmable porno movies where you can type in your preferences to make hours and hours of fun-filled screwing scenes with women who have exactly the proportions you prefer.
Oh, it's a great time to be male!
My point in talking about all that is simply this: How is it that in the midst of all this, we somehow developed enough anal-retentiveness as a society to go all ape-shit when Janet Jackson showed her non-painted, non-CGI generated, and merely B-cup sized boob for half a damned second on the halftime show of the 2004 Superbowl? And why, in the midst of all the scantily-clad female back-up dancers and shirtless male dancers in spandex, did this at all matter?
It's the 21st century going on one decade as of midnight tonight, and we'll have to all recognize that if we can't come to grips with our own skin, we'll never get by. This matters, not because we're a society of prudes who need to get over it -- although that's a compelling enough reason by itself. No, it matters because the advertizers who want to take advantage of us do so by titilating us sexually, and the prudes who fight agaisnt open sexuality unwittingly give them cover -- allowing them to snipe at us with sneak peeks at the forbidden. To free ourselves from this situation, we need to open our minds, and sometimes our buttons, to the reality that nudity isn't such a big deal. With that mindset, society forces advertizers to sell their products based on their merit - and that scares them!
But it matters also to achieving a more peaceful world. There are two simple ways entertainment can be spiced up: One is with more sex. The other is with more violence. And with one avenue closed, the other avenue becomes more attractive to producers. We've seen this with soap operas -- where the endless audience of As the World Turns has gotten bored with all the sex, and so episodes now frequently feature murder. But outside the world of soaps, the avenue of sex has only barely been used, and so we find that our children frequently see people being killed with guns, and seldom seeing the tenderness of human love and affection.
Pardon the double entendre, but fuck that!
Well, I say, more sex, less violence! 'Make love not war' is a mantra that is equally suitable for the silver screen as it once was for the war in Vietnam. And women can easily use their sexuality to persuade more men to be non-violent. O, Woman, thou has more power than thou knowest! Fucking USE it! You'll find that witholding sex from the violent shitheads of this world quickly eliminates their presence. And we NEED that!
And the first step towards that situation, is getting over the nudity. We shouldn't have to resort to CGI or pretty blue or green colors in order to allow us to see skin. Let's be adults about our bodies, for once!
Eric
Sunday, December 27, 2009
A Nice Christmas Poem...
Disclaimer: Every year at Christmas time, I make the case that parents should not lie to their children about anything--even Santa Claus. I feel strongly that telling kids Santa is real is teaching children that lying to those you love is okay. This year, as in many years past, many little hearts will be broken as they learn Santa isn't real. Yet every year, I'm never taken seriously by any parents I mention this to. True, not lying about Santa robs children of the magical element to the holidays, and it's a very important lesson for children to eventually learn that parents aren't infallable, but I still think that the Santa Claus ritual trains children from a very early age to be credulous, and we've got enough of that going around as it is. The following poem is designed to bring home this point. Enjoy!
An Account of No Visit by St. Nicholas
A poem by Eric Hildeman
(Borrowed from the work of Clement Clark Moore)
‘Twas the night before Christmas, when all through the house,
Not a creature was stirring, not even a mouse;
But that was to change before the night ended,
For none was asleep, every eyelid distended;
Our stockings were hung by the chimney with care,
In hopes that St. Nicholas might just soon be there;
But we three kids weren't quite so nestled in our beds,
For visions of espionage danced in our heads;
Tonight we would learn, for once and for all,
Whether Santa was real, or if there was none at all;
And see for ourselves if reindeer could fly,
In defiance of gravity across the night sky.
Brother and sister in their sleepers, and I in my cap,
Had convinced mom and pop we were taking our nap;
When out in the den there arose such a clatter,
We sprang up from our beds to see what was the matter.
Away to the stairwell we flew in a flash,
Sliding down the floorboards, and avoiding a crash.
Peering over the railing at the lit tree aglow,
Gave the lustre of mid-day to the objects below;
And what to our wondering sight should appear,
But a very distinct absence of eight tiny reindeer.
Our parents were wrapping presents so lively and quick,
That we knew in a moment there was no St. Nick.
More rapid than bullets the revelations they came:
All costumes and lies, and a legendary name.
And if all these lessons had come now to naught,
What other things were false that we'd been taught?
Those things which we'd thought so sure and so brazen,
Could they be lies too? Could God? Could Satan?
We spoke not a word, but stared straight at this work,
When mom and pop suddenly turned ‘round with a jerk;
My baby little sister, that jolly little elf,
Had laughed when she saw this, in spite of herself.
The glint in pop’s eye and the tilt of his head,
Soon let us kids know we had plenty to dread!
Pop clenched up his fist out in front of his nose,
And giving a nod, to the stairwell he rose.
He sprang up the stairs, to my team I gave a whistle,
And away we all flew like the down of a thistle.
Back down the hallway the courses we flew,
At our heels, the bogus St. Nicholas, too.
More rapid than eagles his courses they came,
And he whistled, and shouted, and called us by name;
"You doggone kids! You'd just better run!
You've spoiled our secret! You've ruined our fun!”
And hearing these words while running down the hall,
We dashed away, dashed away, dashed away all!
When back in the bedroom I spun back around,
Bro' and Sis' landed back into bed with a bound.
Our pursuer had stopped, leaving us dumbfounded,
’Till we all slowly realized we were certainly grounded.
Though no permanent scars did we receive that Christmas night,
We emerged more confused about what was wrong and what was right.
In the years that followed, in teenage vice,
We listened more to peers than to parents' advice.
And one more lesson that night we were taught:
It’s all right to lie, if you just don't get caught;
Or if certain situations will justify,
The certain variety or use of the lie.
'Tis a difficult problem, and a peculiar plight,
But still....
Merry Christmas to all, and to all a good night!
An Account of No Visit by St. Nicholas
A poem by Eric Hildeman
(Borrowed from the work of Clement Clark Moore)
‘Twas the night before Christmas, when all through the house,
Not a creature was stirring, not even a mouse;
But that was to change before the night ended,
For none was asleep, every eyelid distended;
Our stockings were hung by the chimney with care,
In hopes that St. Nicholas might just soon be there;
But we three kids weren't quite so nestled in our beds,
For visions of espionage danced in our heads;
Tonight we would learn, for once and for all,
Whether Santa was real, or if there was none at all;
And see for ourselves if reindeer could fly,
In defiance of gravity across the night sky.
Brother and sister in their sleepers, and I in my cap,
Had convinced mom and pop we were taking our nap;
When out in the den there arose such a clatter,
We sprang up from our beds to see what was the matter.
Away to the stairwell we flew in a flash,
Sliding down the floorboards, and avoiding a crash.
Peering over the railing at the lit tree aglow,
Gave the lustre of mid-day to the objects below;
And what to our wondering sight should appear,
But a very distinct absence of eight tiny reindeer.
Our parents were wrapping presents so lively and quick,
That we knew in a moment there was no St. Nick.
More rapid than bullets the revelations they came:
All costumes and lies, and a legendary name.
And if all these lessons had come now to naught,
What other things were false that we'd been taught?
Those things which we'd thought so sure and so brazen,
Could they be lies too? Could God? Could Satan?
We spoke not a word, but stared straight at this work,
When mom and pop suddenly turned ‘round with a jerk;
My baby little sister, that jolly little elf,
Had laughed when she saw this, in spite of herself.
The glint in pop’s eye and the tilt of his head,
Soon let us kids know we had plenty to dread!
Pop clenched up his fist out in front of his nose,
And giving a nod, to the stairwell he rose.
He sprang up the stairs, to my team I gave a whistle,
And away we all flew like the down of a thistle.
Back down the hallway the courses we flew,
At our heels, the bogus St. Nicholas, too.
More rapid than eagles his courses they came,
And he whistled, and shouted, and called us by name;
"You doggone kids! You'd just better run!
You've spoiled our secret! You've ruined our fun!”
And hearing these words while running down the hall,
We dashed away, dashed away, dashed away all!
When back in the bedroom I spun back around,
Bro' and Sis' landed back into bed with a bound.
Our pursuer had stopped, leaving us dumbfounded,
’Till we all slowly realized we were certainly grounded.
Though no permanent scars did we receive that Christmas night,
We emerged more confused about what was wrong and what was right.
In the years that followed, in teenage vice,
We listened more to peers than to parents' advice.
And one more lesson that night we were taught:
It’s all right to lie, if you just don't get caught;
Or if certain situations will justify,
The certain variety or use of the lie.
'Tis a difficult problem, and a peculiar plight,
But still....
Merry Christmas to all, and to all a good night!
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
Canadian Health Care - Five "Terrifying" Testimonials
Two blogs in one day? Well, the earlier one was a movie review. This one is a repeat from a woman named Valerie Tarico, who lives in Seattle. Her perspective on Canada's health care system is relevant to my recent posts.
One thing I've noticed: Conservatives say that Canada's system stinks, and liberals say it's reasonably good, but only liberals go up north of the border and actually interview people there. Michael Moore went up there, Air America regularly has canadian guests on, but the conservatives have no counterpoint to this. They don't seem to interview Canadians!
I wonder why?
I dare any conservative readers out there to cite something where a neocon news outlet has interviewed a Canadian. Come on, prove me wrong!
Meanwhile, here's Valerie's post. Enjoy!
Eric
----------------------------------
I married a Canadian, which got me, among other things, some pretty awesome Canadian in-laws, a bunch of friends who think hockey is actually worth watching (not for the same reason I do, which is to nerd out on the fascinating phenomenon of mob psychosis), and two kids who are fiercely proud of their dual citizenship. It also got me a window into the Canadian health system, that bloated bureaucracy of ill-repute which for some bizarre reason provided my father-in-law with an implanted defibrillator and solid, timely medical care during his final years.
Canadians, in my experience, follow American politics more closely than Americans do, and some of them even sign themselves up for my mailing list. So when I sent out my latest lament, "Ode to Health Care Reform: An Absurd Poem about Absurdities," one of the things I got back was a testimonial from the Middle America of the Great White North:
"As a Canadian, I have comfort in the system being provided even with its imperfections. I lost a wife to breast cancer. All the treatments (diagnosis, surgery, chemotherapy and radiation) cost me NOTHING. I am willing to pay an extra tax so I and others can benefit from health care. May I sadly add that what the US has spent on recent wars (Iraq and Afghanistan) can build a nation? It is obvious that those who have less or no voice to voice are not on the 'to do list' of political leaders." – Ibrahim Sumrain (Edmonton, Alberta)
Reading Ibrahim’s note, it occurred to me that maybe we should expose our own Middle America more to the horrors of the socialized medical system under which our northern neighbors suffer out their shabby lives of quiet desperation. So, I solicited a few more comments from acquaintances and friends. They should terrify every blood sucking insurance lobbyist in D.C.
Dorthea Hangaard (Sointula, British Columbia)
"Ten years ago I required surgery to have fibroid tumours removed. Because I live in a remote community, I was concerned I would end up in a rural hospital under the care of a second-rate surgeon. The Canadian health care system allowed me to choose my surgeon (I found a top-rated surgeon), and the hospital (I chose a teaching hospital in Vancouver that I knew would be well-resourced). Not only that, but my compassionate surgeon allowed me to extend my stay in the hospital because I had to travel such a great distance to get home again. While in the hospital, I received the best care available, including radical new procedures not readily available elsewhere.
"All of this cost me nothing more than the small monthly premiums I have been paying in to the medical system since I began a career (those on a low income are exempt from paying premiums). To this day I feel overwhelmed with gratitude whenever I think of the experience. Canadians can't even grasp that people are refused medical treatment in the U.S. because they cannot afford it."
Bill Jamieson (Mayne Island, B.C.)
"At age 76, my dad had an abdominal aneurism, and, down the road, complications related to that aneurism ultimately killed him. If we were in the US and didn’t have health insurance the amount of care that my father received probably would have cost a million dollars. He had the provincial specialists working on him. It didn’t cost us anything. He was being fed through a TPN line through his neck, a liquid diet. It costs a thousand dollars/day, and he was on that for at least a month.
"Most of the interventions that were done on Dad were like rocket science. They were the same techniques that would be done in a top hospital anywhere in the world.
"He got timely care. His surgery was scheduled based on his ability to respond to the surgery and his strength at the time. We felt that his original surgical date, last spring,—if it was in the States it would have been done sooner, but it didn’t need to be done sooner. That is one of the differences between the US and Canada in my mind. You can get surgeries done faster in the States. But if you have a crisis there is no delay.
"This fall, on a hunting trip with my brother, it became apparent that Dad was very sick. In the last surgery my dad had, he had three vascular surgeons, two anesthesiologists, a bowel surgeon and a kidney surgeon working on him over a period of thirteen hours. They were incredible. The ICU team was incredible. I would like to stress how compassionate the care was all the way through. There was real caring that was part of the reason he survived as long as he did."
Gloria Lee Clark (Vancouver, B.C.)
Anna’s experience:
"My sister Anna was at a climbing gym and fell over 25 feet. She managed to break her left femur and hip, smash her left heel, ankle and wrist, and break her right ankle in 2 places. She was taken to the local hospital where she was promptly x-rayed and diagnosed. She was in the hospital for 4 weeks and had a total of 4 surgeries to repair all that was broken. After she was released from the hospital, there were nurses, physiotherapists, and doctors who made house-calls to care for her. When she was able to leave the house she went to the hospital’s out-patient physiotherapist twice a week for many months. A year later she had to have a 5th surgery to remove some pins that were bothering her. Except for the rental of some of the equipment she needed; hospital beds, wheelchairs, etc. her entire care was covered by our Canadian medical system. As horrible as the accident was, and no she will not fully regain all her strength and flexibility, she had the best care possible at the cost of her regular monthly MSP (Medical Services Plan)."
My experience:
"Nine years ago I was pregnant with twins. I was under the care of an Obstetrician and had monthly ultrasounds. At 30 weeks the ultrasound revealed that I was 1 cm dilated and was promptly hospitalized and placed on bed rest, apparently the best prescription for avoiding pre-mature birth. I spent 5 weeks in the hospital under the care of a team of nurses and doctors. At 35 weeks the doctor determined that the babies needed to come out as they were not growing at the expected rate. After their birth I spent 1 more week with them in the hospital, and they stayed for another week. Between me and the babies there was a total of 7 weeks of hospitalization. The total cost for me was zero. Was it absolutely necessary for me to have stayed in the hospital for 6 weeks I will never know. What I do know is that I have 2 beautiful healthy children and I would never have been able to afford the cost of the hospital care had I not had the Canadian medical system supporting me."
Kent James (Toronto, Ontario)
"My dad waited exactly 9 weeks after deciding that he wanted a knee replacement. My son has been treated for asthma since he was 18 months old. My mom is type 2 diabetic. None of them has ever had to wait for anything. None of them has ever had to worry about who would pay for anything. And none of them wants to pay a few less dollars in tax for the privilege of taking on those risks and responsibilities."
----
The Canadian system isn’t perfect. Do people die there from oversights or botched care? Of course!-- just like they do—to borrow Bill’s words—in top hospitals anywhere in the world. But what is more terrifying, apparently, to half of our senators, is that our northern neighbors’ government-managed semi-socialized system works. In fact, for most people most of the time, it works great. Oh, and did I mention the premiums? Dorthea’s costs her $54/month. ("[It] gets me EVERYTHING I need. The best care I can arrange for myself. I choose the doctor, the hospital, my treatment.") Anna’s is $114, for a family of four. That’s Canadian.
Valerie Tarico is a psychologist and writer in Seattle, Washington. She is theauthor of TheDark Side: How Evangelical Teachings Corrupt Love and Truth, and thefounder of www.WisdomCommons.org
One thing I've noticed: Conservatives say that Canada's system stinks, and liberals say it's reasonably good, but only liberals go up north of the border and actually interview people there. Michael Moore went up there, Air America regularly has canadian guests on, but the conservatives have no counterpoint to this. They don't seem to interview Canadians!
I wonder why?
I dare any conservative readers out there to cite something where a neocon news outlet has interviewed a Canadian. Come on, prove me wrong!
Meanwhile, here's Valerie's post. Enjoy!
Eric
----------------------------------
I married a Canadian, which got me, among other things, some pretty awesome Canadian in-laws, a bunch of friends who think hockey is actually worth watching (not for the same reason I do, which is to nerd out on the fascinating phenomenon of mob psychosis), and two kids who are fiercely proud of their dual citizenship. It also got me a window into the Canadian health system, that bloated bureaucracy of ill-repute which for some bizarre reason provided my father-in-law with an implanted defibrillator and solid, timely medical care during his final years.
Canadians, in my experience, follow American politics more closely than Americans do, and some of them even sign themselves up for my mailing list. So when I sent out my latest lament, "Ode to Health Care Reform: An Absurd Poem about Absurdities," one of the things I got back was a testimonial from the Middle America of the Great White North:
"As a Canadian, I have comfort in the system being provided even with its imperfections. I lost a wife to breast cancer. All the treatments (diagnosis, surgery, chemotherapy and radiation) cost me NOTHING. I am willing to pay an extra tax so I and others can benefit from health care. May I sadly add that what the US has spent on recent wars (Iraq and Afghanistan) can build a nation? It is obvious that those who have less or no voice to voice are not on the 'to do list' of political leaders." – Ibrahim Sumrain (Edmonton, Alberta)
Reading Ibrahim’s note, it occurred to me that maybe we should expose our own Middle America more to the horrors of the socialized medical system under which our northern neighbors suffer out their shabby lives of quiet desperation. So, I solicited a few more comments from acquaintances and friends. They should terrify every blood sucking insurance lobbyist in D.C.
Dorthea Hangaard (Sointula, British Columbia)
"Ten years ago I required surgery to have fibroid tumours removed. Because I live in a remote community, I was concerned I would end up in a rural hospital under the care of a second-rate surgeon. The Canadian health care system allowed me to choose my surgeon (I found a top-rated surgeon), and the hospital (I chose a teaching hospital in Vancouver that I knew would be well-resourced). Not only that, but my compassionate surgeon allowed me to extend my stay in the hospital because I had to travel such a great distance to get home again. While in the hospital, I received the best care available, including radical new procedures not readily available elsewhere.
"All of this cost me nothing more than the small monthly premiums I have been paying in to the medical system since I began a career (those on a low income are exempt from paying premiums). To this day I feel overwhelmed with gratitude whenever I think of the experience. Canadians can't even grasp that people are refused medical treatment in the U.S. because they cannot afford it."
Bill Jamieson (Mayne Island, B.C.)
"At age 76, my dad had an abdominal aneurism, and, down the road, complications related to that aneurism ultimately killed him. If we were in the US and didn’t have health insurance the amount of care that my father received probably would have cost a million dollars. He had the provincial specialists working on him. It didn’t cost us anything. He was being fed through a TPN line through his neck, a liquid diet. It costs a thousand dollars/day, and he was on that for at least a month.
"Most of the interventions that were done on Dad were like rocket science. They were the same techniques that would be done in a top hospital anywhere in the world.
"He got timely care. His surgery was scheduled based on his ability to respond to the surgery and his strength at the time. We felt that his original surgical date, last spring,—if it was in the States it would have been done sooner, but it didn’t need to be done sooner. That is one of the differences between the US and Canada in my mind. You can get surgeries done faster in the States. But if you have a crisis there is no delay.
"This fall, on a hunting trip with my brother, it became apparent that Dad was very sick. In the last surgery my dad had, he had three vascular surgeons, two anesthesiologists, a bowel surgeon and a kidney surgeon working on him over a period of thirteen hours. They were incredible. The ICU team was incredible. I would like to stress how compassionate the care was all the way through. There was real caring that was part of the reason he survived as long as he did."
Gloria Lee Clark (Vancouver, B.C.)
Anna’s experience:
"My sister Anna was at a climbing gym and fell over 25 feet. She managed to break her left femur and hip, smash her left heel, ankle and wrist, and break her right ankle in 2 places. She was taken to the local hospital where she was promptly x-rayed and diagnosed. She was in the hospital for 4 weeks and had a total of 4 surgeries to repair all that was broken. After she was released from the hospital, there were nurses, physiotherapists, and doctors who made house-calls to care for her. When she was able to leave the house she went to the hospital’s out-patient physiotherapist twice a week for many months. A year later she had to have a 5th surgery to remove some pins that were bothering her. Except for the rental of some of the equipment she needed; hospital beds, wheelchairs, etc. her entire care was covered by our Canadian medical system. As horrible as the accident was, and no she will not fully regain all her strength and flexibility, she had the best care possible at the cost of her regular monthly MSP (Medical Services Plan)."
My experience:
"Nine years ago I was pregnant with twins. I was under the care of an Obstetrician and had monthly ultrasounds. At 30 weeks the ultrasound revealed that I was 1 cm dilated and was promptly hospitalized and placed on bed rest, apparently the best prescription for avoiding pre-mature birth. I spent 5 weeks in the hospital under the care of a team of nurses and doctors. At 35 weeks the doctor determined that the babies needed to come out as they were not growing at the expected rate. After their birth I spent 1 more week with them in the hospital, and they stayed for another week. Between me and the babies there was a total of 7 weeks of hospitalization. The total cost for me was zero. Was it absolutely necessary for me to have stayed in the hospital for 6 weeks I will never know. What I do know is that I have 2 beautiful healthy children and I would never have been able to afford the cost of the hospital care had I not had the Canadian medical system supporting me."
Kent James (Toronto, Ontario)
"My dad waited exactly 9 weeks after deciding that he wanted a knee replacement. My son has been treated for asthma since he was 18 months old. My mom is type 2 diabetic. None of them has ever had to wait for anything. None of them has ever had to worry about who would pay for anything. And none of them wants to pay a few less dollars in tax for the privilege of taking on those risks and responsibilities."
----
The Canadian system isn’t perfect. Do people die there from oversights or botched care? Of course!-- just like they do—to borrow Bill’s words—in top hospitals anywhere in the world. But what is more terrifying, apparently, to half of our senators, is that our northern neighbors’ government-managed semi-socialized system works. In fact, for most people most of the time, it works great. Oh, and did I mention the premiums? Dorthea’s costs her $54/month. ("[It] gets me EVERYTHING I need. The best care I can arrange for myself. I choose the doctor, the hospital, my treatment.") Anna’s is $114, for a family of four. That’s Canadian.
Valerie Tarico is a psychologist and writer in Seattle, Washington. She is theauthor of TheDark Side: How Evangelical Teachings Corrupt Love and Truth, and thefounder of www.WisdomCommons.org
Avatar...
I don't normally do movie reviews. But hell, it's my blog, and I'll write what I want.
I just saw the movie, Avatar. It was my gift to myself for finishing my last final exam. And yes, the movie is everything you've heard, and more. A film actually lived up to the hype. For once.
The one thing I'd heard about it was that it was similar to Dances With Wolves. And there are certainly obvious parallels with that story, as well as with the story of the holocaust of the American Indians. But what really struck me was how similar it was to lots of other movies we've seen before. Signourney Weaver plays a key role, except this time she's the alien who's invading a host body. Certainly her character is the same sort of hardass eco-friendly role she had when she starred in Gorillas in the Mist. And the mechanized robot machines which every Japanese Anime has used to make mere humans into supermen are eerily similar to the forklift robot that Ripley piloted in Alien 2, as well as those featured in The Matrix: Revolutions. The helicopter gunships are the twin-hooped, double-bladed VTOL variety that was seen in the movie The Incredibles on Syndrome's island, and the colorful jungle creatures that double as beasts to be ridden upon for recreation and war are a step up from the ones we saw in Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith. But really this is the same sort of tree-hugging love-thy-nature sort of plot that pits the machines of industry versus the serenity of nature. We've seen this before in movies like The Emerald Forest, Medicine Man, or Ferngully, The Last Rainforest. (Rubbish, all that. The "noble savage" is as much a myth as the superiority of civilization.) Plus, the plot centers upon the mining of a precious mineral (which the natives naturally happen to live right on top of) which is unforgivably called unobtanium -- a name which has always been a joke, even before it was used as the incredibly heat-resistant metal necessary to the plot of The Core, one of the worst sci-fi films of all time. (Come on! If you're gonna literally steal a plot element, at least have it be something respectable, like dilithium!)
Oh yes, and the alien planet this takes place on is called Pandora. Guess which box gets opened?
That being the case, this movie also goes places no other movie has gone before. First, it's amazing eye-candy! Not since TRON has there been this much neon light-show during a film. The flowers and mosses glow in the dark, and even the mushrooms light up if you touch them. The natives are ten-foot-tall, blue-skinned, elf-like lupine creatures who have powers of agility, vision, hearing and smelling which make the human world pale by comparison. They are humanoid, and so are simultaneously sexy yet eerie. Their hair is not just hair, but fibrous neural tissue that works almost like a USB port, allowing them to "plug in" to things like plants and animals. And here lies the crux of the plot, and the source of the film's name. Humans have figured out a way to interface an alien host body with a human mind. A human can, if genetically compatible, essentially interface into the alien host body's mind through something almost akin to a WiFi/DSL link, like something combining The Matrix with Invasion of the Body Snatchers. In fact, if you unplug the human (as happens several times during the film), the alien body simply goes limp. These alien bodies with human minds are called Avatars, and the general idea is for humans to use these alien shapes to establish friendly relations with the natives, study their culture, bring them civilization, and teach them English. Add to this a paraplegic soldier who's scientist of a twin brother got killed before he could use his Avatar. As such, the soldier gets a second chance to have his legs again by using the Avatar which was once assigned to his brother, despite his lack of academic training.
Well, by now, you can see the plot coming a mile away, so there's no harm in my spoiling anything -- it's completely telescoped. The crippled soldier gets lost in the woods, encounters the natives, lucks out in winning their favor, and is taken in to learn their ways and their culture. His teacher is the tribal princess, so you just know she ends up falling for him in a classic Romeo and Juliet rip off, and that sets the stage for the hurt and betrayal of it being discovered that his mission was to be on the inside and help plan for a military op all along. Naturally, he has a change of heart and a pang of conscience, and ends up fighting for the natives.
But perhaps the oddest thing is that there is a spiritual aspect to the story. The roots of all the plants and trees are networked through the roots, and since animals can interface with them, the planet is essentially one gigantic world-wide-web. It's hub is a grove where a willow-like tree dangles its glowing branches down, allowing people to interface with it, hear their ancestors through it, or even talk to it. The name for this dendritic deity is Eywa, a short-name which immediately calls Gaia to mind. And at one point, the soldier-turned-hero even prays to Her for a miracle in the forthcoming battle, saying, "The Sky People [humans] have no green on their world. They killed their mother." (Preachy! Can anyone say Pocahontas?) Whether this counts as an actual deity or some sort of Theodessic, Terrestrial Pantheism, I'll leave to the interpretation of the viewer.
One thing that isn't subject to interpretation: It's a damn good movie! Go see it!
Eric
I just saw the movie, Avatar. It was my gift to myself for finishing my last final exam. And yes, the movie is everything you've heard, and more. A film actually lived up to the hype. For once.
The one thing I'd heard about it was that it was similar to Dances With Wolves. And there are certainly obvious parallels with that story, as well as with the story of the holocaust of the American Indians. But what really struck me was how similar it was to lots of other movies we've seen before. Signourney Weaver plays a key role, except this time she's the alien who's invading a host body. Certainly her character is the same sort of hardass eco-friendly role she had when she starred in Gorillas in the Mist. And the mechanized robot machines which every Japanese Anime has used to make mere humans into supermen are eerily similar to the forklift robot that Ripley piloted in Alien 2, as well as those featured in The Matrix: Revolutions. The helicopter gunships are the twin-hooped, double-bladed VTOL variety that was seen in the movie The Incredibles on Syndrome's island, and the colorful jungle creatures that double as beasts to be ridden upon for recreation and war are a step up from the ones we saw in Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith. But really this is the same sort of tree-hugging love-thy-nature sort of plot that pits the machines of industry versus the serenity of nature. We've seen this before in movies like The Emerald Forest, Medicine Man, or Ferngully, The Last Rainforest. (Rubbish, all that. The "noble savage" is as much a myth as the superiority of civilization.) Plus, the plot centers upon the mining of a precious mineral (which the natives naturally happen to live right on top of) which is unforgivably called unobtanium -- a name which has always been a joke, even before it was used as the incredibly heat-resistant metal necessary to the plot of The Core, one of the worst sci-fi films of all time. (Come on! If you're gonna literally steal a plot element, at least have it be something respectable, like dilithium!)
Oh yes, and the alien planet this takes place on is called Pandora. Guess which box gets opened?
That being the case, this movie also goes places no other movie has gone before. First, it's amazing eye-candy! Not since TRON has there been this much neon light-show during a film. The flowers and mosses glow in the dark, and even the mushrooms light up if you touch them. The natives are ten-foot-tall, blue-skinned, elf-like lupine creatures who have powers of agility, vision, hearing and smelling which make the human world pale by comparison. They are humanoid, and so are simultaneously sexy yet eerie. Their hair is not just hair, but fibrous neural tissue that works almost like a USB port, allowing them to "plug in" to things like plants and animals. And here lies the crux of the plot, and the source of the film's name. Humans have figured out a way to interface an alien host body with a human mind. A human can, if genetically compatible, essentially interface into the alien host body's mind through something almost akin to a WiFi/DSL link, like something combining The Matrix with Invasion of the Body Snatchers. In fact, if you unplug the human (as happens several times during the film), the alien body simply goes limp. These alien bodies with human minds are called Avatars, and the general idea is for humans to use these alien shapes to establish friendly relations with the natives, study their culture, bring them civilization, and teach them English. Add to this a paraplegic soldier who's scientist of a twin brother got killed before he could use his Avatar. As such, the soldier gets a second chance to have his legs again by using the Avatar which was once assigned to his brother, despite his lack of academic training.
Well, by now, you can see the plot coming a mile away, so there's no harm in my spoiling anything -- it's completely telescoped. The crippled soldier gets lost in the woods, encounters the natives, lucks out in winning their favor, and is taken in to learn their ways and their culture. His teacher is the tribal princess, so you just know she ends up falling for him in a classic Romeo and Juliet rip off, and that sets the stage for the hurt and betrayal of it being discovered that his mission was to be on the inside and help plan for a military op all along. Naturally, he has a change of heart and a pang of conscience, and ends up fighting for the natives.
But perhaps the oddest thing is that there is a spiritual aspect to the story. The roots of all the plants and trees are networked through the roots, and since animals can interface with them, the planet is essentially one gigantic world-wide-web. It's hub is a grove where a willow-like tree dangles its glowing branches down, allowing people to interface with it, hear their ancestors through it, or even talk to it. The name for this dendritic deity is Eywa, a short-name which immediately calls Gaia to mind. And at one point, the soldier-turned-hero even prays to Her for a miracle in the forthcoming battle, saying, "The Sky People [humans] have no green on their world. They killed their mother." (Preachy! Can anyone say Pocahontas?) Whether this counts as an actual deity or some sort of Theodessic, Terrestrial Pantheism, I'll leave to the interpretation of the viewer.
One thing that isn't subject to interpretation: It's a damn good movie! Go see it!
Eric
Thursday, December 17, 2009
What's with the Republicans?
I was listening to the talking heads on the news last night, sniping at each other over the proposed health care bill which is currently trying to overcome its last hurdle in the Senate. Gone is the public option, as good as gone is the Medicare buy-in for people who are old enough to worry that their retirement portfolio might not be big enough yet. In place is the government forcing us to buy into insurance that may or may not be more affordable. So while I was listening to this bit of news being debated, and mulling it over, a question cropped up in my mind, and kept nagging and nagging at me -- because the question makes so much sense, and I don't hear anybody else asking it. Could it be that, as usual, I'm the only one to have thought the whole damned thing through? Well, maybe not, but I'm starting to think I've thought it over far better than the folks in the Senate have.
Here's the question that's been bugging me, and you tell me if it makes sense: With this new version of the bill, why are Republicans not overwhelmingly in favor of it?
Seriously! Imagine, just for a moment, the Republicans were in charge, and drafted a health care reform bill. What would it look like? I think the answer you'd come up with is -- EXACTLY LIKE THE HEALTH CARE BILL WE HAVE NOW!!!
I mean, no public option, no expansion of any role for government, government mandated customers for insurance companies... Is this not exactly the way Rush Limbaugh would have drafted a bill? So why on earth are Republicans not for this? Why are they still universally opposed to what the Democrats are doing? What's gotten into this topsy-turvey, bass-ackward world we're living in?
The best answer I can come up with is that Republicans are doing this for the humor value. It must be all they can do to sit on the Senate floor and not bust out laughing their asses off at how they've got the Dems doing their dirty work for them like a bunch of goddamned marionettes! And, I've gotta admit, it's pretty funny. I'd laugh, except the whole thing makes me feel sick.
(Crap, I hope I don't need a doctor, or I'm fucked.)
It could also be that they realize that if they do a 180 degree turn-around, that Democrats would snap out of their zombie-like trance and realize that they've been following the pied piper right out of town like a pack of rats. Besides, as long as they stay firmly opposed to whatever Democrats do, the perception will always be that Democrats are socializing healthcare (because that's what Democrats DO, isn't it?). So tea-parties continue to protest the handing over of healthcare to a communist agenda, oblivious to the fact that it's being clearly sacrificed to Almighty Indemnity.
L'avante garde!
Or maybe they're opposed to it because they're afraid that any bill that gets past the Senate, even something that merely guarantees bananas for monkeys, is likely to get a public option re-introduced to it when it's reconciled with the House bill.
Do we dare hope for that kind of a last-second touchdown? Given how this has gone so far, I'm not counting on it.
Eric
Here's the question that's been bugging me, and you tell me if it makes sense: With this new version of the bill, why are Republicans not overwhelmingly in favor of it?
Seriously! Imagine, just for a moment, the Republicans were in charge, and drafted a health care reform bill. What would it look like? I think the answer you'd come up with is -- EXACTLY LIKE THE HEALTH CARE BILL WE HAVE NOW!!!
I mean, no public option, no expansion of any role for government, government mandated customers for insurance companies... Is this not exactly the way Rush Limbaugh would have drafted a bill? So why on earth are Republicans not for this? Why are they still universally opposed to what the Democrats are doing? What's gotten into this topsy-turvey, bass-ackward world we're living in?
The best answer I can come up with is that Republicans are doing this for the humor value. It must be all they can do to sit on the Senate floor and not bust out laughing their asses off at how they've got the Dems doing their dirty work for them like a bunch of goddamned marionettes! And, I've gotta admit, it's pretty funny. I'd laugh, except the whole thing makes me feel sick.
(Crap, I hope I don't need a doctor, or I'm fucked.)
It could also be that they realize that if they do a 180 degree turn-around, that Democrats would snap out of their zombie-like trance and realize that they've been following the pied piper right out of town like a pack of rats. Besides, as long as they stay firmly opposed to whatever Democrats do, the perception will always be that Democrats are socializing healthcare (because that's what Democrats DO, isn't it?). So tea-parties continue to protest the handing over of healthcare to a communist agenda, oblivious to the fact that it's being clearly sacrificed to Almighty Indemnity.
L'avante garde!
Or maybe they're opposed to it because they're afraid that any bill that gets past the Senate, even something that merely guarantees bananas for monkeys, is likely to get a public option re-introduced to it when it's reconciled with the House bill.
Do we dare hope for that kind of a last-second touchdown? Given how this has gone so far, I'm not counting on it.
Eric
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
